Hillary's speaking style suffers from being the reverse.  She is too predictably 'on script,' making her delivery sound mechanically driven, rather than 'in the moment' inspiring.  When she does veer from her teleprompter, she measures her words carefully, punctuating them with a lot of annoying "uhs".  Maybe it’s a matter of wanting to be safe instead of sorry,  but her dull rhetoric can sound pretty sorry in itself, even without apology.  She sternly berates Trump about how "words matter".  Yet her own personal dilemma is that the majority of Americans do not take her at her word.  

As in all forms of social media, much of what sells a speech is the sizzle, not the steak.  The evasive quality called 'delivery' is crucial to the  credibility of a candidate.  At the same time, the sense of frankness that comes from 'moving off message,' can  also  unintentionally lead  to  damaging misinterpretations.  Both candidates have landed in hot water over unscripted remarks.  But it's Trump whose goose is continually being cooked.    

In the weeks ahead, will he adopt a more cautious speaking style?  Not likely, because, ironically,  the unscripted outsider moment has also become part of  Donald Trump's appeal.  Rhetorically speaking, Hillary Clinton finds safety in boredom while her opponent finds boredom in safety.  Indeed, what may be packing Trump’s rallies to the rafters is this very quality of seeming spontaneity, dangerous though it may prove.  

 I think it's fair to say that the faithful flock to Trump's tents in anticipation of being treated to a taste of his notoriously blunt speaking style. They seem to love it when he throws in the vintage Trump  "believe me" or "it's a disaster." His use of adjectives to describe others may seem crass or silly, but they stick.  

Body language also plays a "huuuuge" part. in public speaking.  Hillary plods slowly onto the stage at her rallies, clapping her hands, smiling broadly, hugging dignitaries, pointing to the audience  – and grabbing the microphone almost immediately.   She grandly waves her arms and jabs her fingers for emphasis.  Her platitudinous pronouncements  rarely receive rousing cheers.  Some of those in the 'rainbow coalition' seated behind Mrs. Clinton on the stage seem glassy-eyed and distracted.  An exception was Seddique Mateen, the Orlando nightclub shooter's father, who jumped up and waved the  small American flag, even as Hillary bemoaned the tragedy wrought by his dead son.

At gatherings of the Trump faithful.  there is a different vibe;  he speaks to —  not at  —  his supporters in  an almost conspiratorial tone .  Often Trump will ponder aloud what he should do in light of the latest  campaign developments. Should he punch back at those who attack him?   Is there anyone in the audience from Utah?  Don't you love New Hampshire? … I love New Hampshire!  This is the entertainer in Donald Trump that, at its best, can grab an audience by the seat of its pants.  FDR, also a New Yorker, was a very different kind of candidate.  But he  accomplished a similar coziness with his audiences  through his fireside chats.  

Other past presidents, like Reagan and Lincoln, possessed an indefinable  speaking quality that connected with listeners. It's a good trait, but it isn't always found in a good person.  Adolf Hitler was a powerful pubic speaker.  Arnold Schwarzenegger allegedly  praised Hitler once while being interviewed and was roundly criticized for it.  But the fact is that Hitler managed to mobilize an entire nation through the power of the spoken word.  

We're into the final stretch of an election in which both candidates have regrettably high personal negatives.  Hillary's aides may be concerned that she sounds too shrill and comes across as a moralizing schoolmarm.  Trump's team may by now have had it with his contentious adlibbing. There will be  many more  stump talk in the months to come.  But the contrast of their styles and substance will matter most during the three crucial presidential debates planned.   That's when the rubber of speech will truly hit the road.   

©2016 Doris O'Brien for SeniorWomen.com

Pages: 1 · 2

More Articles

• Magazines and the American Experience: Highlights from the Collection of Steven Lomazow, M.D
• From the Office of the Historian: Office of Art & Archives, Office of the Clerk: The 1954 Shooting Onto the House of Representatives
• Jo Freeman Reviews Stories from Trailblazing Women Lawyers: Lives in the Law by Jill Norgren
• Jill Norgren Writes: My Choices of Good Reads For The Past Year
• Jo Freeman: Five Days in DC Where the Post-election Protests Were Puny but the Politics Were Not
• 2020 Election Wrap-Up, Women’s Congressional Policy Institute: As of press time,130 women have been elected to serve in the 117th Congress
• Jill Norgren Writes: Did Women in the US Campaign for Elective Office Fully Invested in the Prospect of Winning? “I cannot vote, but I can be voted for”
• Jo Freeman: How to Debate a Bully
• US Presidential Debates: Three Studies Journalists Should Know About (And The Public!)
• Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Partial Remarks at the University of Buffalo, August 26, 2019: "If I am notorious, it is because I had the good fortune to be alive and a lawyer in the late 1960s"